GM

The transition to EVs continues in slow but consistent increments around the world, and electric car makers are quickly adapting to new technologies to ease EVs’ mass market readiness. Just this week, Tesla (of course), GM, the New Nissan LEAF, Formula E, and Via were in the EV news with announcements, modifications, and rumors. So, in case you missed ’em, check out these EV stories of the week that chronicle the inevitable shift of societies around the world to electric-powered transportation.

GM is pushing forward with plans to produce a fleet of self-driving electric cars that are profitable, as well as sustainable. Can it be done? There’s a lot of uncertainty in the industry at the moment. And, one of the biggest areas of uncertainty facing the manufacturers of autonomous cars isn’t related to technology. It’s related to liability. Now, GM is being forced to find some answers in a California court room.

A motorcyclist attempting to lane-split in heavy traffic crashed while coming alongside the self driving Chevy Bolt, causing “neck and shoulder pain” that have “forced” the motorcyclist to take disability leave from work while undergoing “lengthy treatment” for his injuries.

To GM’s credit, the official DMV report seems to take the Bolt’s side. The Bolt, apparently operating in its autonomous mode in heavy traffic, stopped a driver-requested lane change from the center lane to the left lane because a vehicle ahead decelerated and the gap was deemed too small to safely navigate. While the Bolt was trying to re-center itself in its initial lane, the report says, the motorcyclist “wobbled and fell over,” while trying to lane split. The damage to the Bolt was reported as, “(a) long scuff on passenger side of the vehicle,” according to the same DMV report.

So- was the motorcyclist thrown off by the Bolt’s correction? Is it a cynical cash grab from someone eyeballing GM’s deep pockets? It’s hard to say, especially as it’s still unclear whether the Chevy Bolt in question was one of the company’s “third-generation” autonomous cars that were described recently by GM Cruise CEO Kyle Vogt as “the world’s first mass-producible car designed to operate without a driver.”

One thing that is certain: there will be lots of people in the industry who will be watching this case closely. And, make no mistake, if it sets a precedent against GM, it’s pretty likely that a big part of the much-promised autonomous future might not come to pass, after all.

When we first covered Genovation’s GXE electric Corvette project back in 2016, weI did so with a lot of reservations. Who could blame me? It cost a full three-quarters of a million dollars, promised more than 600 WHP, and would do a claimed, pie-in-the-sky, bats*** insane 205 MPH. Well, a year on and it looks like the finished product is ready. Except, now, it makes more than 800 HP, and will very likely do an IMRA-certified 220 MPH. No mean feat- and I can assure you from experience!

“Holy s***balls!” is right!

There’s almost nothing to criticize about the Genovation GXE Corvette, either. At least, on paper. The GXE will reportedly feature a 60-kWh battery pack good for 130 miles of driving between charges. The battery and motor(s) are arranged to give the electric Corvette a nearly perfect 50:50 weight distribution, too, so there should be no ill effects on the car’s handling, either.

As exciting as the prospect of an all-electric American super car are, it’s important to remember that no one has actually gotten one to play with, yet. So, until they’re in customer hands and performing as promised, I will reserve judgement. But I will say this: we’re just a few hours in, and 2018 is already looking like it’ll be a kicka** year!

All Electric Corvette | Genovation GXE

This story about Cruise Automation was first published by CleanTechnica

GM’s self-driving car development unit, Cruise Automation, gave a number of media figures rides through the crowded downtown San Francisco metropolitan area on Tuesday, giving us a chance to check in on the state of the company’s tech.

So, how did the GM/Cruise self-driving car do on its first media demonstration (non-employees riding in the car)? During the Reuters trip at least, quite well, with the driver only having to take over once — after the car waited for over a minute behind a taco truck where customers were ordering lunch (the driver disengaged simply to move things along, not because of there being any danger).

Notably, though, the system was very cautious — as most competitor systems are as well — with bicyclists approaching from the opposite direction leading to the vehicle slowly down to a crawl, for instance.

Reuters provides more: “A self-driving General Motors Co Bolt slowly drove more than two miles through crowded San Francisco streets in its media debut on Tuesday, but double-parked cars and orange traffic cones tripped up the computer driver, and a taco truck stumped the machine.

“… During a roughly 15-minute ride in a busy area of San Francisco over a 2.2 mile (3.5km) trip, the Cruise-enhanced electric Bolt carrying a Reuters journalist encountered 117 people, 4 bikes, and 129 cars, according to the car’s sensors.

“The car, never moving more than 20 miles per hour, navigated urban traffic, a tram line, construction zones, pedestrians crossing streets, and many double-parked vehicles. Urban environments are as much as 46 times more complex than suburban areas, Cruise CEO Kyle Vogt said.

“‘Looking for a clear path’ screens facing the driver and passengers read several times during the trip, when the car stopped next to some traffic cones or behind double-parked vehicles. After pauses, it restarted and passed the obstacles by itself.”

While that may not sound too impressive to some people, if a self-driving car can travel through downtown San Francisco safely, then it can function in the vast majority of the wealthier cities of the world.

I should probably be clear here — I fully acknowledge that self-driving cars may well never be able to handle the chaotic traffic of many of India’s larger cities, or the tiny and winding medieval streets of some European city centers, or for that matter, areas that are essentially off-road … but that’s not the point. When most people are talking about the rollout of self-driving cars, they are talking about wealthy cities with well maintained road systems — where self-driving taxis stand to make operators and manufacturers quite a lot of money.

A couple of months back, PSA Group finalized its purchase of the Opel brand from GM, for around €1.3 billion. Now, after becoming more familiar with Opel’s internal operations, PSA Group is seeking around half of what it paid to be refunded. The problem? Opel’s carbon emissions reduction efforts were far worse than was disclosed. That’s according to unnamed sources cited by Reuters.

PSA Group reportedly believes that GM intentionally misrepresented the challenges facing Opel and its emissions trajectory. Despite earlier expectations that Opel was on track to miss CO2 reductions targets by “just” 3.7 grams, the brand is reportedly on track to miss by over 10 grams, which would relate to a European Union fine of around €1 billion, going on PSA sources.

This increased gap was partly the result of GM forecasting unrealistically high diesel car sales (despite the ongoing diesel car scandals) and partly the result of extreme reliance on the Opel Ampera-e as a sort of compliance car. The Opel Ampera-e, you see, was being sold at a loss of almost €10,000 per car — hence the reason for freezing sales in Norway and increasing the price.

“Their technical solution was economically unviable and would have led to enormous losses,” one of the unnamed sources was quoted as saying. “So, the first thing you do is drop that (product) line, but then the fleet emissions explode.”

“People who had worked on the closing realized quite quickly that there were these big discrepancies,” another one noted. “They had been swept under the rug.”

Reuters provides more: “PSA, which completed the acquisition in late July, said earlier this month it will need to move Opel models onto its own more fuel-efficient technology faster than planned, in order to cut carbon dioxide emissions before new EU limits are phased in from 2020–21, backed by hefty penalties.

“The companies have discussed the grievances raised by PSA, which has yet to initiate a formal claim, sources close to both manufacturers said. … The acquisition deal, published in GM regulatory filings, provides for compensation payments if either party has been misled. Claims not settled by negotiation are referred for arbitration. For tax purposes, a GM payment to PSA would be treated as a deduction from the purchase price.”

As a result of the “challenges” identified at Opel, PSA Group is now rushing out plug-in all-electric and hybrid versions of the Opel Corsa, Crossland X, and Grandland X — which weren’t expected to be electrified so quickly, going on the company plan unveiled earlier this year.

Apparently, essentially the whole Opel lineup will now be redeveloped with PSA Group engines and architectures by as soon as 2024 — 3 or some years earlier than first planned.

The rush job is seemingly necessary because, without it, the fines set to be imposed on PSA Group beginning in 2021 in Europe would be crippling. Beginning in 2021 in the European Union, you see, auto manufacturers will be expected to meet a fleet carbon emissions limit average of just 95 grams per kilometer (down from 130 grams today). Those that don’t meet this limit will be subject to a fine of €95 per vehicle per excess gram of carbon dioxide emitted — hence the rush amongst European auto manufacturers in recent times to go electric.

It’s noteworthy, though, that if the European Union’s vehicle emissions testing protocols weren’t such a farce, essentially no major auto manufacturers in Europe would be able to meet the new limits.

To close things up here, I’ll leave you with some quotes from PSA Group CEO Carlos Tavares on the subject, which were made earlier this month: “We became aware a few weeks after we finalized the closing that the company was going to the wall on CO2 emissions.

“We put our teams to work to completely rebuild the product and technology strategies. If you fail to comply (with EU rules), the weight of fines you are hit with can threaten the company’s existence.”

It’s a strong incentive to attempt to get a partial refund, it would seem. It’s not clear yet, though, how effective the attempt will be — GM, after all, isn’t going to want to part with such a large chunk of change and can likely claim (we presume) that all the assumptions were presented before the sale.

On a related note, the comments concerning the Opel Ampera-e being sold at a loss of nearly €10,000 was a bit surprising, and makes one wonder about the reasons for the much higher loss margin than the Chevy Bolt EV is reportedly facing. Perhaps this is — yet again — a matter of counting R&D costs and somewhat disingenuously not acknowledging that those costs diminish and eventually go away as more units are sold? This has long been a tool to batter the “high cost” of brand new electric models.

First we had Ford announcing the formation of its new Team Edison unit to focus on electric cars. Now we have Mark Reuss, vice president of global product development for General Motors announcing his company will introduce two new EV models in the next 18 months with a total of 20 planned by the end of 2023. “GM believes the future is all electric,” Reuss said.

He admits the process is complex, saying there won’t be “one year where we flip a switch and it’s all electric.” Feedback from customers will be important in deciding which products to build. “An electric solution cannot be one size fits all. We believe you need both battery electric and fuel cell electric. How we apply each of these technologies will depend on what we hear from customers about their needs.”

Chevrolet’s original sales plan for the Chevy Bolt — its long-range, all-electric car — was to begin nationwide deliveries in September. That timeline has now been moved forward by a month. This week, Steve Majoros, Chevy’s head of automobile marketing, said that orders can now be placed in all 50 states and that deliveries will begin across the US in August.

Fred Liguori, another Chevrolet representative, confirms that advanced timeline and says that deliveries to an additional 5 states will begin by the end of June, bringing the total of US states where the Bolt is now available to 21.

The rollout of the Bolt has been a bit fraught, according to Majoris. “It’s this delicate balancing act,” Majoros said. “But we think we’re at the right level of sufficient inventory. We can keep feeding where there’s a stronghold of sales.”

Inventories in California are greater than expected. In the Golden State, the Chevy Bolt has not been flying off dealer lots as quickly as Chevrolet hoped it would. In fact, dealers in that state have already begun discounting the cars to reduce inventories while dealers in other states are charging a premium for the cars.

Meanwhile, buyers are queued up waiting for deliveries in South Korea and Norway. Last week, Pope Francis took possession of a white Ampera-e — the European version of the Bolt — as part of the Vatican’s plan to convert its fleet of automobiles to electric cars.

Speaking about the revised plan to get the Chevy Bolt into all states sooner, Majoris told the press, “We were waiting for the training to be done. We were waiting for the right tools to be in place. We are kind of ahead of schedule on implementing all of those things as well as making sure we have enough sufficient inventory.”

Through the end of May, Chevrolet has sold 5,950 Bolts, compared to 9,187 Volts. No doubt, wider availability of the Chevy Bolt will help boost its sales numbers in the US. Now that the Bolt will be available in all 50 states soon, Majoris says Chevrolet will kick off a “highly targeted” national advertising campaign in the near future.

It will be interesting to see what that means, exactly. One of the complaints about EV advertising so far is that it caters to early adopters who have already made up their minds to buy an electric car and does little to educated the mainstream shoppers who may be confused about electric cars and their many benefits.

Elon Musk may be standing on top of the world today, but it was not always so. In yet another Twitter blast, Musk revealed that Tesla was not started to milk government subsidies and it was not about making money. In fact, he thought the company had a 90% chance of failure. This is something longtime Tesla followers know, but the ever-growing list of Tesla fans surely needs a Twitter catch-up course once in a while.

Who Killed The Electric Car?

“Few people know that we started Tesla when GM forcibly recalled all electric cars from customers in 2003 & then crushed them in a junkyard. That was done against the will of their owners, who held a candlelight vigil all night to protest the death of their cars.” That decision by GM was chronicled in the 2006 movie Who Killed The Electric Car?

In the past few months, Tesla’s stock valuation has soared past that of GM. Is it true that General Motors killed its innovative electric car program in order to protect its core business based on the internal combustion engine? No one knows for sure, but if it did, it was certainly one of the biggest blunders in history.

“Since big car companies were killing their EV programs, the only chance was to create an EV company, even tho it was almost certain to fail. Nothing to do w govt incentives or making money. Thought 90% prob of losing it all (almost did many times), but it was the only chance,” Musk tweeted. Asked if he now considered Tesla a success, Musk tweeted back, “Long way to go, but we’ve convinced most of the auto industry to start EV programs & gave them all our patents to help, so that’s something.”

Indeed, it is. With production of the Model 3 set to begin in a few weeks, the Tesla Semi reveal coming this fall, the Model Y under development, and a Tesla pickup truck in the pipeline, Tesla has certainly come a long way in a very short time.

Live Streaming & Voice Commands Added

Musk also tweeted that live streaming and a new voice command feature have been added to Tesla cars. “Just tap the voice button on the steering wheel and say ‘Play Monty Python’ or ‘Navigate home’ or anything. Voice commands work pretty well.” Musk is a huge Monty Python fan. Now Tesla owners can watch any Python skit on the 17″ touchscreen embedded in the dashboard of their cars using only voice commands. The new feature only works within the United States at this time.

More Model 3 Spy Shots

Meanwhile, more and more pre-production Model 3 sedans are showing up on public roads near the Fremont factory, leading to lots of new spy shots on the internet. The white car above was the subject of a video by BGR that went live on YouTube yesterday.

Then this video of a black Model 3 with the numbers “007” on the rear window and an odd sensor mounted on the roof appeared online.

Elon Trolls Short Sellers

Model 3 fever is gripping the automotive world and driving Tesla stock into the stratosphere. Musk took a moment yesterday to level a broadside against those who are shorting Tesla stock. A story published by Investopedia this week says that more and more investors are betting against the company.

“These guys want us to die so bad they can taste it,” Musk tweeted. “Just wish they would stop sticking pins in voodoo dolls of me. That hurts, ok?” So far, market watchers estimate short sellers have lost over $5 million betting against Tesla. Now the total of short positions is approaching $10 billion, according to Investopedia. Some people never learn. Et tu, GM?

The Chevy Bolt EV is now available for order in the country of South Korea, according to recent reports. Deliveries to the market are expected to begin next month (in April).

Interesting news considering that nationwide Chevy Bolt EV deliveries in the US haven’t even begun yet — and, for that matter, deliveries (of the Opel Ampera-e rebranding) aren’t expected to begin in Norway (where there appears to be quite strong demand) until May. Considering that the units to be sold in Norway are rebranded, though, the delay makes some sense.

Still, I have to wonder why deliveries in South Korea begin before deliverers across the US have begun in earnest. Who knows?

Push EVs provides more: “GM Korea used the first day (yesterday) of the fourth International Electric Vehicle Expo to start taking orders for the Chevrolet Bolt EV, which will arrive at Chevrolet Korea dealerships next month. The Chevrolet Bolt EV is expected to be much more successful than its plug-in hybrid sibling, the Volt, which is already on sale in South Korea.

“The increasing expansion of Bolt’s availability outside the USA, might mean that GM finally realized that this electric car is much more appropriate for the Asian and European markets that prefer hatchbacks that are small on the outside but big on the inside. Unlike the USA market that prefers bigger cars like the ones sold by Tesla. The ultimate test of this car’s success will happen in Norway, with first deliveries of the Opel Ampera-e confirmed to start in May.”

An interesting point — though, I still think it’s an open question how much GM actually wants to sell the Bolt EV. How much it actually wants to sell large quantities of them, that is.

An epic battle is brewing between the EPA and CARB. Back in 2009, the US auto industry was on the ropes. GM in particular was facing bankruptcy and Chrysler stood on the brink of going out of business altogether. Then Uncle Sugar swooped in with offers of bailouts and loan guarantees. The car companies all stood up like eager Cocker Spaniels and said, “Yes, please. We would love some of those treats you have there.” The feds said there was a catch, though. “To get the goodies, you must first agree to a new CAFE standard of 54.5 mpg by the year 2025.”

“Yes, Uncle Sugar,” the car companies all replied. “We would be honored to make that promise to our dear Uncle who loves us and has such deep pockets.” And so the deal was done, the money flowed, and the industry recovered enough to establish new sales records for cars and light trucks in the US in 2015 and again in 2016. Then The Trump Who Stole Democracy came to town and the car companies immediately started talking out of the other side of their mouths.

“Oh, Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump. Please don’t be making us stick to the those promises we made 6 years ago. We were held hostage. We signed under duress. That mean ol’ Obama forced us to do it. Cut us some slack, dear kindhearted Mr. Trump, and roll back those fuel economy standards we all agreed to, cuz otherwise we won’t be able to sell every high-profit, gas-guzzling luxobarge we can weld, bolt, and screw together. We sure do like making a killing on those big vehicles, so you gotta get us off the hook here. And besides, a million or more American workers who all voted for you are going to lose their high-paying jobs if you don’t help us out.”

“No problem,” The Trump said. “I’ll just stick my close personal friend Scott Pruitt in as the head of the EPA. He hates the EPA. Loathes it the way a crime boss loathes competition. He’ll fix you right up.” And so it came to be, thanks to a compliant Congress that took one look at The Trump’s Cabinet full of Horribles and said, “Yes, sir. That’s a fine group of Americans The Trump has nominated. We’ll approve all of them except for that Secretary of Labor guy who runs a business where sexual harassment is on the menu at every one of his many restaurants. Even we have limits!”

The Evil Pruitt is now in a position to give the car companies what they so desperately want. The only question is, can Pruitt undo the regulations that Obama’s EPA — the one that actually gave a rat’s patoot about protecting people from premature health issues and death — set in place? The answer is, as usual, “It depends.”

California is the eye of the hurricane. It has been agitating for stricter emissions standards since the late 60s. When it comes to aggressive environmental policies, it is Ground Zero for the treehugger movement in the US. Things would be different if one sixth of all cars and light trucks weren’t sold in California, but they are, which makes The Golden State the tail that wags the dog when it comes to the auto industry.

No company can afford to ignore California if it wants to sell cars in the US market. “For the past 50 years, California has led the country and the world when it comes to clean cars,” Margo Oge, who directed EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality from 1994 to 2012, tells The Washington Post.

Ask most people what is holding back the electric car revolution and they will tell you it is a lack of EV charging infrastructure. Confusion about how charging stations work is a close second. Recently, Alex Davis wrote an long and sometimes amusing piece for Wired that focuses on the difficulties he encountered finding places to charge the Nissan LEAF he borrowed for week long test drive.

He begins by explaining why an EV is fundamentally different from a car with an internal combustion engine. It’s more like a smartphone. Use it, plug it in overnight, use it again the next day. He calls it the “grazing versus gorging” model. Which is all well and good if you have a place to plug your EV in overnight. Davis lives in an apartment building in San Francisco and so he was totally dependent on public chargers. That’s where his problems began.

When he needed to recharge, the navigation system directed him to a facility that was no longer functional. Precious miles were wasted driving to the closed location, which only made his need to find a working charger more critical. Next, he drove to a hospital parking lot, spent ten minutes driving around but could not locate the charger that was supposed to be there.

Ah hah! There’s a charger at a nearby mall according to his smartphone app. Except this charger is not part of the ChargePoint network that his borrowed LEAF is linked to. Frustrating minutes leak by while he struggles to set up an account so he can access the charger. Fortunately, it’s not raining. After establishing an account, he plugs in but the car won’t connect to the charger.

Davis spots a ChargePoint location on the other side of the mall, but both chargers are in use. He has to wait 20 minutes for one of them to become available, than another 30 minutes to get enough of a charge to get home. A trip that should have taken an hour took three. Plus, Davis’ nerves are seriously jangled as a result of his travails. That’s why many people want nothing to do with an electric car.

The federal government and several major car companies are partnering to expand EV charging stations across the country. For its part, the government is making $4.5 billion in loan guarantees available to promote the project. Ford, General Motors, Nissan, and Tesla will participate as well. The expansion is designed to help ease “range anxiety” among drivers who operate cars with plugs.

GM has responded promptly to erroneous fuel economy claims for some of its 2016 SUVs. The models involved are the Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Buick Enclave. The window stickers on those vehicles were inaccurate. On average, they claimed the vehicles actually got about 2 miles per gallon better gas mileage than they actually did. The correct numbers are now posted on the EPA website. Corrected window stickers have been placed on all unsold vehicles.

GM has told Chevy, GMC, and Buick dealers not to sell any new 2016 GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Traverse SUVs until new window stickers are available and installed. The new stickers are on their way to dealers and should be substituted for the originals by next week.

Featured Motorcycle Posts

Advertisement

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.